Why Senator Kirsten Gillibrand Won't Name Those Sexist Senators

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand—often heralded as our strongest chance at seeing a woman in the Oval Office, after Hillary Clinton—has a foul mouth, a very foul one for a politician. During Monday's MasterClass at Hearst, while discussing the male senator who called her porky, the New York Democrat flung the word "asshole" into the audience I was sitting in, and you could actually watch the rows of shoulders bracing like a wave. Not at his comment (which is well-publicized by now, enough to lose some of its oomph) but at her reaction. Is she allowed to say that?

Most Popular

It wasn't just a slip of the tongue for 47-year-old Gillibrand, who was the youngest senator in office when she was sworn in in 2009. In Gillibrand's new book, Off the Sidelines: Raise Your Voice, Change the World, out yesterday, she uses not one but three f-words, which she winnowed down from six f-bombs at a girlfriend's nudging. "I only used them when they were integral to meaning of the sentence," she shrugged at the book Q&A. Within the framework of her personality, the profanity comes off more honest and refreshing than cavalier or crass, just another part of why Gillibrand is considered the Capitol's "natural leader" of the "chutzpah caucus," according to the New York Times. She's got a serious spark beneath those watery blue eyes, and people really, really like that about her. Myself included, after I got a chance to talk to her one-on-one.

Gillibrand jolted our chat with an energy belying the fact that she'd been up at dawn for the Today show. Her intensity revealed itself when I asked her what issues women should be focused on right now, since we already know that we should care about, say, Hobby Lobby and campus sexual assault. With her insider insight, did she want to put any causes on womens' radar besides those headline-monopolizing things?

"No, I think women should care about those issues," she said, firmly. "I think they should really begin to be heard on issues that affect them. Like, is their college campus safe? Are these schools' administrators protecting the men and women who go to school there? And what are legislators doing to make sure schools are doing their jobs? I think these are really important issues that hadn't seen the light of day. There's been no legislative action at all, whether it's sexual assault in college campuses or sexual assault in the military. These are fundamental rights for women that are being undermined so we feel like there's no hope for justice."

In a way, it was a positive statement, when you think about it. Women are focusing on the issues that really matter, and our priorities (anxieties? concerns?) are in the right place. Because isn't that half the battle, or at least the start?

I then asked Gillibrand about her female role models beyond Hillary Clinton, who wrote the introduction to her book. Her non-famous person name-dropping surprised me:

"There are two women called Annie [Clark] and Andrea [Pino], who've started this movement about safety on campuses because they were brutally raped and not believed, and then retaliated against [by people at their university]. So they've started a movement by going to campuses and getting women to tell their stories and standing behind them, inspiring them to be strong and to fight for what they believe in. And there's a woman locally, Emma [Sulkowicz], who's at Columbia; she's walking around Columbia with a mattress on her back to show the world what she feels like she's been carrying [post-rape]. I think those women are really inspiring. They are so brave and so fearless. They're making a difference just by speaking truth to power."

That answer mirrored something else Gillibrand said in the Q&A, when she was talking about why she hasn't specifically named those offensive, misogynistic colleagues who commented on her appearance (even when Matt Lauer was pressing her about it on Today). According to Gillibrand, she won't do that because she hopes that it will "elevate the conversation to a broader level." It makes sense. While we should support the victims and honor these women who do put their names out there—the Emmas, Andreas, and Annies— we should do the opposite for the men who say and do things to promote sexual discrimination and violence. Keeping the offenders nameless in the media may help people continue to talk about the larger problems, rather than dwelling on a particular person, which is smart. Really fucking smart, as Senator Gillibrand might say.